gamersfanonfandomcom-20200215-history
User blog:Sir Joseph Grey/Proposals for Reformation
''This blog is for the purpose of helping to revive and reform the Wiki. It is not in any way meant to spark drama, and/or fighting. Any rude comments will not be tolerated, and will be reported to the Administration. Thank you. '' Due to recent drama and chaos, I believe it is necessary to take a survey of the Community's opinions. This blog is in no way an Administrative vote, or a Community vote. It is simply to post ideas for reform, that may be added to the Seven Seas Court in due time. Post your proposals in the comments section, and I will add them to the blog. All users can agree with the proposals added, and if they reach enough agreements, I will request said proposal to the Seven Seas Court, with the Admins knowing that a good portion of the community supports said proposal. Thank you. Process: #Write your proposal, with the category as the Header. (You can also add categories that are not listed here) #I will add the proposal to the Blog. #Users must vote on the proposal in order for it to make its way to SSC. This is to decrease failed SSC reguests. #10 supports will result in said proposal being posted to SSC. 10 opposes will result in said proposal being removed from the blog. Policies Users and Voting Rights *User:Lord Hector Wildhayes - I propose that we use a reverse voting standard approach so where instead of there being an admin-only vote prior to the community-wide vote, it be reversed. The community should have the first say, and then the administrators should vote on behalf of what the community wants. Seeing as the administrators are the representative leaders of this community, that's how it should work. This is how the U.S. government functions. The senate/HOR votes in favor of their respective districts, I.E. - (Popular Vote). I know this isn't a "government wiki", and I'll probably get trampled for mentioning the government, but hear me out, I think this is a great proposal and the possibility of its enaction should be taken into deep consideration amongst us all. Sysop Structure * User:Jeremiah Garland - I think a clause should be made concerning just how many people are in charge of the wiki. We really need to put a limit on it, because the promotion requests I see popping up left and right are ridiculous. It's no secret that the wiki's population has decreased, and therefore we don't need ten users with power when five would do. If I were to suggest some numbers, I'd say never let there be no more or less than three administrators operating the wiki, one being a bureaucrat. Obviously having one administrator wouldn't work out; if there's only two they'd tend to agree with each other too often and nothing would get done; if we have four, it makes voting awkward; and five is just too much. Three seems like a decent number in that it keeps a balanced equilibrium of power and us regular users don't become intimidated by admins galore. As for rollbacks, I don't see why we should need more than two at any given time. It's essentially a meaningless position anyways; they're basically admins that can't ban people. For chat moderators, we honestly shouldn't need more than one or two. Firstly because chat isn't as frequented as it use to, and therefore there's not as much rule-breaking to oversee. Secondly, there's almost always an administrator in chat, and I don't think we need a whole SWAT team of people with special stars next to their names outnumbering us in chat. On somewhat the same lines, I'd like to say something that isn't necessarily a request, but shouldn't hitherto be disregarded: ''when the hell did "he's a good, mature user" become a legitimate reason to promote somebody? ''Looking at all of the recent promotion requests, I see that everywhere, but sometimes in different words. Have we really stooped so low that all it takes to achieve any power on this wiki is to be "good" and "mature"? I know I said rollback is a meaningless title (which it is), but their vote in vital administrative decisions is still equal to that of an admin, and I want someone qualified to cast such votes, not random users who have just reflected nicely on the administrators by kissing their asses every chance they get (and indeed I do see that going on here). Promotions on this wiki use to mean something; they were a sign of a user's hard contributions and dedication to the wiki. Nowadays, it's more of a reward to users in the administrative favour. Anyways, the gist is we don't need twenty-seven rollbacks and chat mods in order for this place to function, especially given our current "condition". I firmly believe we need to put a halt to anymore promotions, at least for the time being. I see a lot of promotions going around, but a disturbing lack of fanon being written, which kind of ruins the point of the wiki, and thus ruins the point of the promotions. Yes, I realise the game is closed and it's difficult to be motivated to write, but let's not forget why the wiki was created. I and many others are tired of the politics of the wiki. Inactive Admin Policy *User:Lord Hector Wildhayes - Personally, unless there's a notice in advance, I would consider a week's absence at the ''most ''to be inactive. That's pretty generous if you ask me. If I'm right, I've been hearing everyone pushing for more activity, more pages, more blogs, and whatnot. That will never happen without an active administration leading the way. Not to say that our administration is highly inactive, but I do very much think that we should tighten up on the policies to prevent things from ever ''becoming ''this way, and potentially dragging the rest of the community down along with it. Miscellaneous Category:Blog posts